sliding eastward underneath the continental plate of North America. This eight-hundred-mile (1,300 km) fault, the boundary line between two tectonic plates, will later be named the Cascadia Subduction Zone. As I listened to John Adams, it sounded exactly like Dieter Weichertâs description of the plate that got stuck sliding underneath Mexico. Until September 19, both fault systems had been thought of as aseismic.
I didnât know it at the time, but John Adams had already been studying this mystery for five years. He had published three papers on faults that lie deceptively silent for hundreds of years, including an alpine fracture zone in his home country of New Zealand. Now, in one long breath, he had just warned us that what we saw in Mexico City might also happen in the Pacific Northwest. And Adams wasnât the only one to say it.
Garry Rogers was the young PGC seismologist whose job it was to monitor the two hundred or so temblors that rattle through southwestern British Columbia every year (only two or three of which are strong enough to be felt). He told us the historical lack of huge megathrust events off the west coast of Vancouver Island could be very misleading.
âThe implication,â said Rogers with focused intensity, âis that the possibility for very large earthquakesâthe kind that occurred in Mexico just recentlyâdoes exist on the west coast of Canada. The problem is that in the 150 short years that weâve been here, we have not seen any examples of earthquakes on our subduction zone. Not even small ones.â
He explained that those two hundred rumbles occur because of stress within the overlying crustal plate, relatively close to the surface. The much larger shockâif it does happenâwould occur almost forty miles (65 km) below ground along the length of the subduction zone. Like Adams, Garry Rogers thought the absence of deep Juan de Fuca quakes put seismologists in a quandary.
âAt the moment, we just donât know,â he said. âItâs a subject of scientific debate. But if we compare other areas around the world that are very similar to our subduction zone, we find that we are the only one that has not had large earthquakes.â
For seismologists in 1985 it was hard to imagine why the Juan de Fuca plate (or the Cocos plate in Mexico) would be specialâthe only place on the planet where two plates glide past each other trouble free. How could this not be like the dangerous and deadly subduction faults off the coasts of Alaska, Chile, and Japan? Although Rogers didnât seem like a gambler, he was willing to speculate.
âA more likely scenario, comparing it with other zones, is that we are capable of large earthquakes but with very long intervals in between them,â he said. The long quiet history of Juan de Fuca could mean âitâs stuck and one of these days weâre gonna have a monster earthquake like Mexico had.â
If the fault were âstuck,â I wondered, could the build-up be measured andâif you could see the stress increasingâwould it be possible to predict the next quake? âIt may be,â answered Rogers. âAnd, in fact, one rather suspects it should be, because before such a large earthquake a tremendous amount of strain is stored up. We might be able to detect a deformation like that. In fact, they can see this kind of thing in Japan since their last big earthquakeâdeformation going on.â
Evidently rocks bend and tilt under stress and there are changes in electrical signals coming from the earth, all of which could be monitored. Rogers described prediction as a dark art that was still many years away from success, but his point was that there are things we could and should be doing to confirm or deny the possibility of large subduction earthquakes off the Pacific Northwest coast.
It turned out that John Adams was already doing exactly that kind of research. Less